What the experts say...






As an amateur in the field of archaeology, I know that if I "try out an idea" like saying "the white powder layers near the Dead Sea are ash", I will need to show a lot of evidence before most people will believe me, but unlike professionals, amateurs don't feel pressured by their source of income or organisation to come up with, or stay with a particular view, so it is easier for them to discuss their findings, and change their ideas.

The trick to doing good amateur work, is knowing when to get help from professionals.

Since the sites I am looking for have been totally consumed by fire, a long time ago, I would not expect to find obvious artifacts, but I can look at the chemistry of each possible site and see if that helps.

X-ray fluorescence semiquant multi-element analysis is a good way of seeing what something is made of, so I got the professional help of Spectra Chem Analytical to do this work for me.

Here are a few of the results, and they appear to support the ash idea, ( very strong support ) but a page of numbers by itself is not clear enough for most people for it to be "an ensample" as mentioned in 2nd Peter 2:6.

I think there is still something big to be found, something that is clear to everyone. Maybe while the ash was fluidised, many big items sank, much like the way the sulphur is part way down in the ash. Subsurface interface radar maybe worth a try.


more results in excel format

this shows results for Dead sea water, sediments, and a dark layer at Gomorrah.

and more results in excel format

Dark rock is from Sodom, dark layer is from Gomorrah, white porous rock is volcanic rock from New Zealand, and yellow deposit is carefully selected sulphur from a volcanic steam vent.


On my way home from Israel, I stayed at Andrews University for a few days with relatives there, and I was introduced to Timothy Standish. My brother knew Timothy's father, and they were aware of Rons work. Timothy offered to look at a sample with the electron microscope, so I left a small sulphur capsule behind. If I had known of this opportunity earlier, I would have dug deep for a good sample, but all I had spare was a small sample I picked up off the ground, where it had been exposed to the weather, and dirt from the streams that run though the ash. Timothy did a good job of looking at the samples, and came to the correct conclusion that there was evidence of water action visible, and that there where carbonates there. He ended with...

CONCLUSION: The results are consistent with these materials coming from precipitation in a drying out lake or sea. The source of these materials is unlikely to be an ancient city destroyed with fire and brimstone.

Unfortunately his conclusion based on one contaminated sample has convinced a few people, and that has resulted in a lack of interest from those who have the skill to check these sites properly.


Hosted by www.Geocities.ws

1